Randolph E Schmalz
Dr. Ann Haugo
Theory and Crit. 479
05/09/2013
Harry Potter and the Feminist, Critical Race Theory Alchemical Amalgam
After 10 years, 4,195 pages, over 375 million copies
and eight films much has been written on the Harry Potter
novels, films and the general phenomenon with great
specificity and analysis. And there is more to come to be
sure. The film industry turned J.K. Rowling’s seven books
into an octology, a word not currently in the dictionary
but used frequently in reference to films. Formerly an
eight part series was an octad and a seven part series, a
septenary. In fact a book series of seven had no term
before now. There is still no real agreement as to what a
seven part series should be termed. Prior to Harry Potter
any series after four was considered to reference film.
What about the Hardy Boys? One could argue it’s an
impossibility to separate the films from the novels
regarding this series in particular. They’re wrong. Albeit
there may be a valid argument on some level, however there
is undoubtedly a chasm of difference between the literary
and the filmic. Film has innate limitation whereas the
imagination has none. But, when we get to imagination and
things of the sort, we enter the land of subjectivity and
so the plethora of novels of all things Harry hit the
shelves and the trite discussions like the one that began
this piece began and continued and continue.
The various readings for 479, Theory and Criticism,
didn’t literally reference (save the occasional picture)
visual materials, however the power of the visual was
discussed in several sections, Elam’s “Indiana-coffin”
(Emmett Till) picture comes to mind as one of the more
powerful images, though not seen, but described. The
narrative had a far more profound effect of the same
occasion as depicted in the famous photograph simply
because it was describing a visual element. The picture
set the moment in stone, much like the images of Harry
Potter will forever be burned into our minds as the films
2
that represent Rowling’s story. Can you see anyone but
Daniel Radcliffe as Harry Potter? We accepted Michael
Gambon as Dumbledore upon Richard Harris’ death, but
Dumbledore was not the lead thrust of the story. And many
Harry Potter fans lamented the death of Richard Harris, not
only for the obvious reasons of the loss of a great artist
and actor, but perhaps, for some, more profoundly over the
loss of “the real Dumbledore.” We had to accept Gambon as
Dumbledore beginning with the third movie, The Prisoner of
Askaban. Ironic that was the movie Alfonso Cuarón directed
and is currently considered and arguably so, the most
theatrically and artistically successful of the eight.
So, here I wrestle with all this information, the
funny arguments about inventing words to describe the
literary accomplishment, comparison discussions as to
which movies are better than which, directors too. In a
bit we’ll hit on the fact that Rowling revealed that
Dumbledore was gay, so of course it’s tempting to view
this massive body of work through the eyes of an elderly
gay man, albeit instrumental to the story, but not the
3
story itself. I searched for a somewhat original spin, not
only on the individual stories, but the overarching
message as well. The Reality Check and the accompanying
race theory didn’t seem viable, as the European point of
view on race is an entirely different subject, though
there is some value in examining it secondarily and will a
bit later. There’s the cultural impact, of course, to be
considered, the enormous popularity and its subsequent
effect, but its enormity is inarguable and unfolding
before our eyes. The Harry Potter films have had an
enormous impact on many levels we all agree. But, where
might there be disagreement with the film’s, and
originally Rowling’s intentions in terms of theme and
message?
I posit there is a subconscious feminist theme to the
Harry Potter film series that is at the heart of its
success because it touches us in ways we can’t quite
understand in a conventional manner. There is a cyclical
element to the series. The hero essentially experiences
the same set of circumstances eight times. Harry does so
4
with different levels of complexity and layering in terms
of the evolution of personal character, setting and depth
of plot. But, the stories within the overarching story of
“the boy who lived” are arguably formulaic. Harry’s
circumstances in the very first episode pit him for a
second time against his nemesis Voldemort (the first being
when he was a year old with no real memory of the event).
The villain’s plan, here and always, is to obtain an
object, set of circumstances, or in the end the free will
of the hero himself, only to be thwarted inexplicably, by
Harry, with the help of his friends and more importantly
others more experienced and often unseen. This is
Rowling’s genius. There are subplots afoot before they are
fully revealed, many leading nowhere near the main theme.
The author has in fact compared the organization of the
fantasy world of Harry Potter to a mathematical endeavor.
Certain parts of the equation needed to reveal at a
precise moment for reasons we now understand; it was
always about Lily and the love a mother has for her son.
But, the importance of the latter is revealed in bits of
5
information through the cyclical nature of the action and
given circumstances. We are programmed to concentrate on
story and plot and all the interesting little gadgets of
the fully formed meta-world as we march down the seemingly
linear, very natural narrative to which we are all too
accustomed. In the end we are fooled as to the true
message of Harry Potter. We are misdirected because the
same story is replayed in expertly disguised versions with
very few true elements key to the through-line of the plot
being carried with the story, which she works like a
malleable piece of clay.
Through the cycles of Harry’s trials and tribulations
we are slowly but surely shown the idea that women are at
the heart of all things living on any level, in any form.
In Prisoner of Azkaban we see a decided change in Hermione’s
character. She is empowered by who she is becoming. And
all Lily had to do was stand in front of Harry’s crib to
put the future into motion; the ability of the female to
act contains power. It is described as old powerful magic
from the mouth of Joseph Fiennes, the Voldemort we know
6
from the films. He acknowledged its power and dismissed it
quickly as he does most that he finds distasteful,
arguably part of his downfall. Ah hubris!
Lily was not a feminist by any conservative account.
She was an opinionated, independent woman evidenced by her
dismissal of Snape so early on in life. How hard did Lily
work to save her friend from the clutches of evil in
Snape’s case? She didn’t; she was offended and unwilling
to forgive her long time childhood friend. It wasn’t Lily
at fault in some twisted, reverse Oedipal indication; she
dismissed him long before the events that begin the film
series. But, Lily was the driving force of things to come.
It was her choice of mate that set the scene and the given
circumstances of our complex friend Snape and the whole,
really quite simple, story. I hold that Snape stands alone
as the sole representation of the masculine in the series.
Rowling is revealing her own feminist ideals through these
characters and the ways they interact. Snape is by far the
most complex character in the series, inscrutable to the
children at best and a private man among his peers. But,
7
the male is a necessary lynchpin in procreation and so
must be represented, ever-present and disposed of when his
purpose is served turning the school presumably to Minerva
McGonagal the next headmistress of Hogwarts School of
Witchcraft and Wizardry when all is set right post mortem.
A new era will dawn led by the female sensibilities of
Minerva McGonagall.
Voldemort is a sexless villain. He is indicated as a
male, but exhibits no sexuality at any time in any of the
films. He is a helpless eunuch long since damned by Lily’s
sacrifice. I wonder if Voldemort could have ever really
harmed Harry. I don’t deny the existence of other forces
surrounding our hero, but if there is one element of
Harry’s life that rules his actions and others’ actions
often to great lengths, lies in Lily’s original sacrifice.
We meet Harry at the age of 11, seven movies later he
makes it to his parents’ graves. It’s a long time to
literally be running in circles. A circle set in motion by
his mothers sacrifice and currently by his good friend
Hermione Granger (who has long since been revealed as the
8
character Rowling based on herself) a character always
ready with any information the plot may need at any given
moment, the spell or plan to move them along. A secret
agent of sorts meant to slow them down as evidenced by
Dumbledore’s words in the Kings Cross scene in the final
and eighth installment of The Deathly Hallows. This is a world
powered by women. From Mrs. Weasly’s shrill admonitions to
the almost masculine villain, Voldemort.
Harry returns to the same place every year in each
film, from the same female dominated household, save the
last two films and subsequently presented with a mystery
to solve. It’s the Nancy Drew Mystery’s at Hogwarts from a
certain point of view. And Hermione is the perfect device
to introduce any information at any time; she is the
“know-it-all.” She is truly close to “knowing it all”, in
terms of their academic world. Hermione saves their lives
on countless occasions based on her intellect, ability to
plan and anticipate multiple outcomes of any given
situation. Again, Harry and his best friend Ron would have
been left in very precarious situations if not for
9
Hermione’s scholarship. She is so much the glue of the
trio that when we see Ron and Harry becoming more
magically active, it is in contrast to Hermione’s
established mastery.
Many gateways through which Harry must travel
throughout the films are first and foremost driven by his
mother’s sacrifice. It’s his mother’s dying voice he hears
when a Dementor (a particularly ugly product of the evil
that abounds) gets the better of him. Seemingly always he
works because of, or with a woman’s help including
Quidich. We see a woman placed directly in Harry’s path as
an obstacle on more than one occasion. Order of the Phoenix
truly underlines this theme with the ultra obsessive
Professor Umbridge and her foil, the cackling ghost,
Moaning Myrtle. The latter just happens to be standing
sentry at the opening to the Chamber of Secrets (second
movie). Again, another symbolic female barrier the male
boy hero must traverse to reach the goal that saves
mankind for another day. It’s the Ravenclaw ghost standing
between Harry and the last piece of Voldemort’s soul
10
(other than the snake) at the end of the tale. Perhaps
this is Rowling’s comment on the more militant feminist we
found described in the Fortier and discussed in class. The
films didn’t need to go out of their way to send a
traditional feminist message. Rowling created a world for
the films devoid of the trappings of reality’s anti-
feminist sentiment.
J.K. Rowling has publically announced that the
character of Dumbledore was gay. She didn’t want to bring
it into the books or movies for reasons of what she termed
“distraction.” She essentially didn’t want it to become
about Dumbledore’s homosexuality. But, again we have a
touch of the feminine sensibility at the heart of the
story and driving the story. There is certainly maleness
in a very traditional sense as we’ve discussed and seen in
Snape.
Remember, however, our hero is a happenstance hero
due to a woman’s actions. Snape, once evil, turned to the
side representing good. But, what was his symbol of this
good side? It was Lily. She simply wouldn’t stand aside
11
when the fruit of her body was threatened. Would you stand
your ground? Harry’s father stood his ground too, but it
had no effect, his strings were cut like a puppet with no
safety net in place for his family, ineffectual and
emasculated, dead. He did buy time to allow Lily to get
into position that set into motion the story that has
changed lives. It is a story at its heart about a woman’s
ultimate sacrifice for her son.
Race is never mentioned in the films in any
conventional way. However, the representations of the
other races Rowling created (goblins, elves, separate
human delineations: wizard, muggle and squib, one who was
born to magical parents however possess no magical powers
themselves). The way in which these different
classifications are viewed and treated is a symbolic
stand-in for racial commentary. It is said Goblins aren’t
to be trusted. We are told by Ron that the Wizarding World
accept that House Elves want to be enslaved; yet the main
House Elf in the plot, Dobby, very much enjoyed his
freedom. The scene of his death was meant to underline
12
this theme. The small elf was happy to die free, in the
arms of his friend. The cost of freedom embodied in the
small effeminate creature cradled in the arms of our hero,
still not quite a man is an excellent symbol of perhaps
another meaning of the films of Harry Potter. In a
subsequent scene a goblin is surprised by Harry’s
reverence toward the House Elf and the care in which Harry
took when he buried Dobby’s without the use of magic by
hand. In the world of the films the lesser races died for
the mainstream after all; the goblin had reason to wonder.
The House Elf in question had also been programmed to
cause himself physical pain to punish his perceived bad
behavior. The very garb he wore was the “mark” of the
House Elf’s enslavement, so Dobby explains in Chamber of
Secrets. This particular racial read of the story is
secondary commentary, but I believe support to the main
Feminist thread I’ve delineated. Many of the same
standards to measure equality between the races are used
to determine equality between the sexes as well.
13
Harry’s tasks must be completed on a timetable. He
must complete his task without his mentor or friends at
his side before he reaches manhood. This point is critical
to my theory in that no truly male presence influenced
Harry in the end. He was raised in the Petunia dominated
atmosphere of 4 Privet Drive, following her orders for the
first eleven years of his life. And almost immediately
upon entering Hogwarts he has Hermione to fill the vital
role of power female. The entire story is based on this
idea of “the boy who lived,” not “the boy who lived, grew
up to a strong, male, patriarchal figure and finally, in
the end, predictably defeats Voldemort.” No, the women and
their children are the heart and soul of Warner Brother’s
films not the traditional patriarchal model we’ve come to
expect. The patriarchal narrative is still there for those
that need it; again, part of Rowling’s genius. It was this
unexpected, lengthy journey of J.K. Rowling’s brand of
feminism educating Harry as she educated us. The very word
“boy” conjures images of androgyny, pre-pubescence,
something almost feminine perhaps.
14
Even on the evil side of the fence in the films, the
strongest figure other than the androgynous, barely human
Voldemort is Bellatrix LeStrange. Her force as a sorceress
is made clear as unequalled in terms of her ability to do
absolutely anything to anyone at anytime. When we finally
see Lucius Malfoy in contrast to his wife and son, we see
his weakness for the first time, when the power of the
female was present for that first time we’re allowed a
peak inside their home encircled with strutting peacocks.
Prior to that moment all we ever saw was Draco and Daddy
here and there. This is an intentional withholding of
information on the part of the author to draw attention to
the moment when it finally happens. We see Lucius and
Narcissa together as husband and wife, parents of Draco
Malfoy for the first time. And it’s not until the last
movie we’re allowed to see the other side of all we
experienced with the Malfoy family. Draco does not come to
the “winning” side at the end of the final installment he
goes to his mother. After all he’s been through, let’s not
minimize the pain of those who have to live with actions
15
they’ve taken in the name of a cause in which they once
believed, or joined out of cowardice to die for one’s
principals. And after Draco joined his mother, the father
hastily, almost oafishly followed, classically looking
over his shoulder while his wife and son marched on, never
turning back. Again, we see the will of the female make
the first gesture of reconstruction, even before the
outcome is known, but somehow Narcissa knew and walked on,
nay walked away. She knew it was done and so it was. Call
it woman’s intuition.
In terms of the films created from the works of J.K.
Rowling I think we’ve seen the message of a liberal
feminist who’s tendency is to want to work within the
existing patriarchal system. I don’t think eight movies
from seven novels come from Warner Brothers with anything
but a veiled liberal feminist message.
Seeing the primary problem as gender that women have
to tackle at various points in the plot to clear the way
for the hero. For Liberal Feminists, it means, working
within the existing system to get women into positions of
16
power. In the world of Harry Potter it is a clearer more
theatrical assertion of the feminine power I’ve delineated
and more. I’ve not addressed Harry’s female peers, other
than Hermione wherein lies examples of not only the
predominant brand of Liberal Feminism expressed in the
Harry Potter stories. But examples of Radical or Cultural
Feminism along with Social Feminism are there as well in
contrast and competition to and with each other. There are
indirect examples to be drawn from the non-human creatures
symbolizing aspects of Mankind: the Centaurs warlike
nature, the brutality of the Giants and the greed of the
Goblins to name just a few.
But, more closely related to the other two
alternative Feminist movements we see, Luna Lovegood
working outside the system, quietly accepting the
intertwined nature of a perceived patriarchal system
having been raised by her father primarily (her mom died
when she was only a bit younger than when we meet her in
the story), she supports her father’s arguably capitalist
endeavors with the newspaper she distributes. One could
17
argue his current efforts of running a free alternative
newspaper is mere investment toward a more capitalistic
endeavor in the future, a future for which Luna shows
support. And finally Luna had the confused gender issues
that can accompany the loss of a same sex parent and was
primarily raised almost exclusively by her father, their
bond evidently having gone beyond a normal daughter/father
relationship. They were more best friends and mutual
support than father and daughter. They came to depend and
rely on one another, or perhaps it is that Mr. Lovegood
responded well to Luna’s having stepped up to fulfill some
of her mother’s duties. Again, we see the female holding
the family together in tragedy, even at such a young age,
all evidenced by the state of the father when Luna went
missing. He began to come apart at the seams and even was
willing to trade Harry’s life for Luna. Luckily Luna was
more of a social feminist or the situation may have turned
out worse for her (i.e. working within the system).
For my third and final example of the modern
stratification of Feminism we find in the Harry Potter series
18
we have the Radical, or Cultural feminist represented in
contrast to the main idea of the Liberal Feminist. The two
terms are not interchangeable (Radical/Cultural Feminism)
but very close in meaning. They tend to valorize women’s
culture as distinct from the culture of men and would, for
example, propagate the “earth mother “ ideal. Professor
Sprout is an ideal “earth mother” example, literally
caring for the creatures that come from the wizard’s
version of Botany, the earth. Along with Madame Hooch, the
flying instructor, symbolically representing a female’s
ability to literally fly higher and faster than a man. We
see the value of all three by comparison and contrast in
the films. In Liberal Feminism we see an acceptance of the
patriarchal as the norm and the female’s innate ability to
outstrip their male counterparts. Ironically, Hermione,
our symbol of Liberal Feminism hates flying. From a
symbolic point of view Rowling is possibly saying that
even though a woman can possess strength in a myriad of
processes, lines are drawn, however, Hermione drew this
particular line herself. Hermione will not cross that
19
imaginary line in much the same way Professor Umbridge is
intractable regarding the other side of the spectrum.
Umbridge seeks control over her entire world, a world
seemingly run by the patriarchal structures in Rowling’s
fantasy world. But, is this a world run by the patriarchal
standards of old, or are we being shown a glimpse the
coming transition? Hermione is the liberal feminist still
seeing men as the norm to which women need to become
commensurate (i.e. equality). Her S.P.E.W. (Society for
the Preservation of Elfish Welfare) endeavors serve as a
perfect metaphor of the Liberal Feminists constant
struggle. A Liberal Feminist is not a woman who has given
up the fight for equality; the prototype simply has
expanded her views as to what should be included in the
argument. For example, and again, Hermione’s S.P.E.W.,
serving as our metaphor here from the films, is the
Liberal Feminist’s tenet of finding value in a woman who
tends to a household either primarily or solely. The elf
stood in, symbolically, for women and Hermione’s efforts.
It’s a middle ground in which both men and women recognize
20
there are issues and slowly we expand our purview and find
a place where we can co-exist. And isn’t that the
overarching theme of the Harry Potter films, peaceful
coexistence regardless of race, gender or any other device
that creates separation between sentient beings? The
answer is yes, of course. Harry Potter tells us that
anything is possible regardless of any societally
perceived limitations. A strong feminist message is
contained among the many statements Rowling attempted to
make, but it’s only one. I believe there is so much more
to be mined from the filmic counterpart of Harry Potter. The
series serves as a sort of manifesto of how to be with
each other. When the formulaic and fantastical is stripped
away we find solid advice for humanity.
21
WORKS CITED
Baggett, David, and Shawn E. Klein, eds. Harry Potter and
Philosophy: If Aristotle Ran Hogwarts. Peru: Open Court
Publishing Company, 2004. Print
Cherland, Meredith. “Harry's Girls: Harry Potter and the Discourse of Gender.”
Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy. Volume 52, Issue 4
(2008):
pp273-282.
Colbert, David. The Magical Worlds of Harry Potter: A Treasury of
Myths, Legends, and Fascinating Facts. New York: Berkeley
Books, 2004. Print
22
Fortier, Mark. Theory/theatre: an introduction. New York:
Routledge, 2002.
Print (pp. 107-131) *
Haugo, Ann. “Drama Theory and Criticism.” Illinois State
University. Room 115, Bloomington, IL. 23 April 2013.
Class Lecture
Krunoslav Mikulan. “Harry Potter through the Focus of
Feminist Literary Theory: Examples of (Un)Founded
Criticism.” Journal of International Social Research. Volume 2.
Issue 9 (2009): p288-298. Milner Library Online PDF
Reinelt, Janelle G., and Joseph R. Roach, Eds. Critical Theory
and Performance.
Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2007.
Print*
*Refers to assigned reading specific to Feminism and
Critical Race Theory topics.
23
Top Related